Obama Administration Scandals

[c1ue]

Re: Obama Administration Scandals

This was an interesting conversation and I was waiting for someone to touch upon this directly, but no joy. Does anyone have a handle on "operation mockingbird?" Is there any reason to suspect this is not going on right now, albeit in a far more sophisticated manner?

I'm not sure what the need for 'operation mockingbird' is these days. Americans are everywhere, and America has more than enough money and power to buy pawns in all sorts of places.

Besides which, there has always been a delicate balance between the press and government. On the one hand, there is the need to get news. On the other hand, there is the need for access. Corporatization of journalism diminishes the former and adds the extra bonus of corporate ideology.

[Woodsman]

Re: Obama Administration Scandals

If you read the piece, you'll likely stop using phrases such as "there has always been a delicate balance between the press and government." The evidence is strong enough by now to make a convincing case that the elite press is an adjunct of government, rather than its adversary. Individual reporters - at least those not on a secret government payroll and agreements - may do their best work each day, but when the owners and publishers are letting intelligence agencies plant assets, use their papers as cover, and disseminate black propaganda, then what difference would the work of any concientious reporters make to anyone?

If a scandal involving secret agencies is revealed, there's a strong chance that it was a planned release; either a limited hangout or part of a disinfo operation intended to draw attention away from something worse. I expect the Ivy Leaguers who made this happen believed they were acting for the greater good, but the weight of history and current events has made a mockery of their good intentions. On matters of fundamental importance, the media stopped reporting the news years ago.

[c1ue]

Re: Obama Administration Scandals

If you read the piece, you'll likely stop using phrases such as "there has always been a delicate balance between the press and government." The evidence is strong enough by now to make a convincing case that the elite press is an adjunct of government, rather than its adversary.

The delicate balance is the desire of some journalists to have access to those in power vs. the desire to gain readership through breaking news.

As for planting - having a pseudo-journalist be an actual spy isn't any different than a 'cultural attache' in an embassy. It equally isn't different than having raw data feeds from which stories are written be accessed by intelligence types.

The real question is - are the real journalists spies?

For that matter, in the Hearst era, the so-called journalists would actually create the news. Hearst was integral to the US attacking Spanish possessions via the Spanish American war.

So while it is sad that the MSM today is basically worthless in terms of actual reporting, on the other hand it isn't like this hasn't happened before.